Commissioner of Taxation v Qantas Airways Ltd [2012] HCA 41 – taxpayer made taxable supply to passengers where the passengers did not show for flight – at [33]: the taxpayer supplied to customers at least a promise to use best endeavours to carry the passenger and baggage, having regard to the circumstances of the business operations of the airline – this was a a “taxable supply” for which the consideration, being the fare, was received – appeal [2011] FCAFC 113 – tribunal [2010] AATA 977

Commissioner of Taxation v Secretary to the Department of Transport (Victoria) [2010] FCAFC 84 – the Department made a creditable acquisition in respect of payments made under a statutory taxi program which provided subsidised fares for disabled passengers – at [39]: the arrangement can be seen as tripartite (involving the taxi-cab operator, the member and the DOT), whether there is a taxable supply from the taxi-cab operator to the DOT, for which the DOT gives consideration, calls for a different analysis from the question whether there is a taxable supply by the taxi-cab operator to the member, for which the member gives consideration. The answer to the one enquiry is not necessarily determinative of the answer to the other – at [56]: there were two supplies by the taxi-cab operator, the supply of transport to the member and the supply to the DOT of the transport of the member – the payments by DOT were “in connection with” that supply

Waverley Council and Commissioner of Taxation [2009] AATA 442 – credit card administration fee not a taxable supply where the underlying supply not taxable because it was not subject to GST as a Division 81 charge – at [42]: the administration fee was not a stand alone fee, but was correctly characterised as part of the fee for the underlying supply – there was one payment, and in a practical sense there was one supply

Commissioner of Taxation v Reliance Carpet Co Limited [2008] HCA 22 – vendor made a taxable supply where the purchaser of real estate defaulted and the contract was rescinded and the deposit was forfeited to the vendor – at [41]-[42]: where a contract proceeds to completion there is not a second “taxable supply” as the deposit is applied as consideration for the supply on completion

AGR Joint Venture and Commissioner of Taxation [2007] AATA 1870 – whether a transaction for the supply of coin blanks by the applicant constituted a single taxable supply or two separate supplies, with the first supply the input taxed supply of credit to customer’s metal account and the second supply the service of fabricating the metal into coin blanks – at [34]: in ascertaining whether a transaction should be regarded as several distinct supplies as opposed to one composite supply, it is necessary to consider the true and substantial nature of the consideration given in return for the payment

Westley Nominees Pty Ltd v Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty ltd [2006] FCAFC 115 – first instance – [2005] FCA 839 – at [59]-[61]: the Full Court disagreed with the primary judge who found that the rent payable under a shopping centre lease was consideration only for the supply of the premises and the annual percentage rental and contributions to outgoings of the centre was not consideration for that supply – the consideration included the rent and the contribution to outgoings – determining whether expenditure secures an ancillary and incidental separate and discrete supply from the main supply or whether it forms part of the consideration for a single supply reference is to be done by reference to what the expenditure is calculated to effect from a practical and business point of view, rather than upon the juristic classification of legal rights secured, employed or exhausted in the process: referring to Hallstroms Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1946) 72 CLR 634 at 648.

Harley-Davidson Europe Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2017] UKUT 873 – VAT – single or multiple supplies – whether subscriptions paid by members of the Harley Owners Group are consideration for a supply of membership or for multiple supplies comprised of the individual benefits conferred – held multiple, not single, supplies

Friends of the Earth Trust Ltd v Revenue and Customs (2016) UKFTT 411 – whether payments made by supporters of appellant were donations or consideration for supply of magazine and other benefits – (street fund-raisers engaged by appellant charity to sign up passers-by on street to make regular direct debit payments to appellant) – payments were donations not consideration for supply – appeal dismissed

Royal Troon Golf Club v Revenue & Customs [2015] UKFTT 121 – VAT – whether a supply by an unincorporated association to its members is a taxable supply by a taxable person – yes – whether an unincorporated association is distinguishable from its members when making supplies –yes – whether supplies are non-taxable because consumed by members of an unincorporated association in a private capacity – no.

Finnamore (trading as Hanbidge Storage Services) v HMRC [2014] UKUT – the appellant granted customers a lease or licence over a small area of an open storage depot to customers, whilst also hiring out a shipping container, resting on the relevant small area of land, so that the customer could keep goods securely, and protected from the weather, in such containers – the overarching description of the supply was of the provision of storage services, and that was so regardless of whether the charge for the lease of the land, and the importance of that element, exceeded the charge for the container

Level Verzekeringen & OV Bank [2006] STC 766 – a supply to an insurance company of a pre-existing software program, coupled with the supply of considerable services in tailoring the software specifically to meet the customer’s particular requirements, was a supply of services, notwithstanding that the provision of the software in isolation would have been a supply of goods was based on the observation that the customisation services were the predominant element of the supply

Byrom, Kane & Kane (t/a Salon 24) v Revenue and Customs [2006] EWHC 111 – he appellant supplied a lease or licence of a room in a building described as a massage parlour to ladies, and also provided various massage parlour services to the ladies – there was a single supply and that the supply was of massage parlour services on the basis that “massage parlour services” was the overarching description that aptly described the totality of the supplies.

Customs and Excise v Plantifor Ltd [2002] UKHL 33; [2002] 1 WLR 2287 – whether seller of goods by mail order liable for tax on postage charges paid by its customers – whether amounts for postage received as agent of the customers or as consideration for a service – found that the seller was acting as a principal and received consideration for providing a service of arranging delivery of the goods

Dr Brian Hurd Dentistry Professional Corporation v The Queen 2017 TCC 142 – whether there was one supply of orthodontic treatment to a dental patient or two supplies, an orthodontic appliance and an orthodontic service – whether single zero rated or exempt supply, or if distinct supplies whether those supplies were zero rated or exempt – held that the taxpayer made a single exempt supply of orthodontic treatment

The Great-West Life Assurance Company v The Queen 2015 TCC 225 – whether the fee payable by the taxpayer insurance company to a third party to perform services in relation to the determination and payment of benefits under the prescription and dental components of group health plans entered between the insurance company and employers constituted consideration for a taxable supply or a “financial service” as defined in s 123(1) of the Excise Tax Act – at [65]: the Court accepted that the supply was a single supply as the various services were intertwined, interdependent and integral to one another – at [69]: to determine whether the supply constitutes a “financial service” the Court must first determine the essential character, or substance, of what is being supplied and then determine whether the supply falls within the definition of “financial service” – at [78]: the essence of the service was the payment of the plan benefit to the plan member, the other services simply supported this objective – at [83]: the supply fell within the definition of a “financial service” as “the payment or receipt of an amount in full or partial satisfaction of a claim arising under an insurance policy”

Tele-Mobile Company v The Queen 2015 TCC 197 – whether the supply of a telecommunication service of roaming airtime in the US was part of a single supply of telecommunication services which included long distance calls from the US to Canada or a separate supply taking place entirely in the US

Calgary (City) v Canada 2012 SCC 20 – Single supply or multiple supplies ― City acquiring and constructing transit facilities ― City claiming and receiving public service body rebates for portion of GST paid ― City also claiming input tax credits in respect of GST paid on purchases made for transit facilities ― Whether acquisition and construction of transit facilities constituting an exempt supply, a taxable supply or both ― Whether “transit facilities services” a taxable supply to the Province separate from exempt supply of “public transit services” to public –Case analysis

GSTD 2009/1 – Austlii – Goods and services tax: is a supply by way of an in specie distribution of an asset that is applied in an enterprise carried on by a discretionary trust to a beneficiary of the trust made ‘in the course or furtherance of’ the trust’s enterprise?

GSTD 2005/5 – Austlii – Goods and services tax: are supplies of membership and membership services made by a tread exchange to its members taxable supplies?

GSTR 2003/14 – Austlii – Goods and services tax: the GST implications of transactions between members of a barter scheme conducted by a trade exchange

GSTR 2003/6 – Austlii – Goods and services tax: transfers of enterprise assets as a result of property distributions under the Family Law Act 1975 or in similar circumstances

GSTD 2000/12 – Austlii – Goods and services tax: is the provision of labour hire services a taxable supply in terms of section 9-5 of the GST Act?

GSTD 2000/7 – Austlii – Goods and services tax: is the supply of the services of apprentices or trainees by a Group Training Company to host employers under a Group Training Scheme a taxable supply in terms of section 9-5 of the GST Act?

Reglon Pty Limited v Commissioner of Taxation [2011] FCA 805 – taxpayer who obtained judgment in conversion against defendant in respect of goods did not make a supply of those goods to the defendant, notwithstanding that the effect of the judgment was to vest the ownership of the goods in the defendant – at [32]: the transfer of ownership in the goods, and the extinguishment of the taxpayer’s ownership by operation of law, occurred without assent and was triggered by the payment of the judgment sum by the defendant – the payment did not depend upon any action of the taxpayer and in those circumstances the taxpayer did not make a supply (Case analysis)

SXGX and Commissioner of Taxation [2011] AATA 110– the sale of land by the applicant to the Qld government was a supply – that the land was within an area identified for compulsory acquisition and that the resumption process had commenced, did not affect this conclusion as it was not a compulsory acquisition

Commissioner of Taxation v Gloxinia Investments (Trustee) [2010] FCAFC 46 – at [87]: s 9-10(1) indicates that a narrow or restricted interpretation is not intended by the notion of supply and in particular it does not permit, unless the particular context of the provision in question requires it, any restriction to what was posited as physical supply as opposed to other forms of supply – first instance – [2009] FCA 641

Hornsby Shire Council and Commissioner of Taxation [2008] AATA 1060 – the compulsory acquisition by the Council of a quarry from CSR pursuant to a notice issued by CSR requiring the Council to acquire the land involved a “supply” by CSR within the meaning of s 9-10 – there was a relevant nexus between the giving of the statutory notice and the acquisition of the land – at [70]: there is support in the authorities for the view that some positive action is required by the supplier for there to be a supply

Commissioner of Taxation v Reliance Carpet Co Limited [2008] HCA 22 – at [37]-[38]: the contractual obligations of a vendor on entering into a contract of sale involved a supply by the vendor in terms of s 9-10(2)(g) and a supply in terms of s 9-10(2)(d) pursuant to the extended definition of “real property” as there was upon exchange of contracts the grant by the taxpayer to the purchaser of contractual rights exercisable over or in relation to land, in particular of the right to require in due course conveyance of the land to it upon completion of the sale

Westley Nominees Pty Ltd v Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty ltd [2006] FCAFC 115 – first instance – [2005] FCA 839 – at [22]: the purchaser of a reversionary interest in land makes a supply to the tenant under s 9-10(2)(g) by assuming the legal obligation to honour the lease – at [23]: while not necessary to decide, the indications point away from the conclusion that the purchaser made a supply within its ordinary meaning in s 9-10(1) by way of lease of the exclusive possession of the premises

Hedqvist [2015] EUECJ C-264/14 (European Court of Justice) – bitcoin transactions are constitute the supply of services for consideration – the transactions are exempt transactions as they are to be treated the same as the exchange of traditional currencies

GSTD 2005/6 – Austlii – Goods and services tax: does a club, association, trade union, society or co-operative make a supply when it imposes a non-statutory fine or penalty on a member for a breach of the association’s rules?

GSTD 2001/2 – Austlii – Goods and services tax: is the sale of goods by a lessor on expiry of a lease agreement a separate supply to the lease of the goods?

TT-Line Company Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation [2009] FCAFC 178 – the amount received by TT Line from the Commonwealth as reimbursement under a scheme was consideration received by TT line “in connection with” the supply of transport services to members of the public – the exemption in s 9-15(3)(c) did not apply as the appropriation was to provide a benefit to the passenger not the government entity (TT line)

AXA Asia Pacific Holdings Limited v Commissioner of Taxation [2008] FCA 1834 – at [91]: a supply is “for consideration”, so long as there is a payment, act or forbearance “in connection with” the acquisition. It suffices that there is a payment, act or forbearance furnished by the actual acquirer even though, by reason of the supply being an “acquisition supply”, the actual acquirer is a deemed supplier.

Commissioner of Taxation v Reliance Carpet Co Limited [2008] HCA 22 – deposit forfeited to vendor by defaulting purchaser is “consideration” for a supply by the vendor to the purchaser – at [28]: it is sufficient that one or more characteristics of the deposit forfeited to the vendor satisfies the criterion of “consideration” – at [33]: the payment of the deposit was “in connection with” a supply by the vendor as the payment of the deposit obliged the parties to enter into mutual legal relations which executory obligations and rights

Keenhilt Pty Ltd as trustee for the CHC Services Trust [2007] AATA 2095 – supply of tax minimisation and avoidance schemes by applicant was a taxable supply notwithstanding that applicant did not received payments – it was sufficient that the payments made were “in connection with” the supply – at [28]: the law does not require that the payment be made to the person supplying the service

TSC 2000 Pty Ltd and Commissioner of Taxation [2007] AATA 1629 – applicant received bets from members not as agent for members but as consideration for taxable supply – at [68] references in contractual documents to applicant acting as agent for members not detract from conclusion, the legal description to be applied to a contractual relationship is to be determined by reference to the terms of the relationship rather than the description applied by one of the parties

Food Supplier and Commissioner of Taxation [2007] AATA 1550 – the supply of “free” promotional items with coffee is not GST-free but a separate taxable supply – at [8]-[9]: the consideration was for the packaged product as a whole, including the promotion item, the purchaser made a payment “in connection with” the supply as a whole (s 9-15(1)(a), words such as “in connection with” have a wide meaning, alternatively payment is made “in response to or for the inducement” of the supply (s 9-15(1)(b)) – at [9]: the word “consideration” in taxing statutes is general “not to be read as requiring identification of the consideration sufficient to support a contract” (referring to Chief Commissioner of State Revenue v Dick Smith Electronics Holdings Pty Ltd [2005] HCA 3.

Shophold (Mauritius) Ltd v The Assessment Review Committee [2016] UKPC 12 – whether a taxable person, who has a contractual right to be paid for the services which it has provided, is obliged to pay Value Added Tax (“VAT”) even where it has waived the enforcement of its contractual right and has neither issued an invoice nor received payment for those services – meaning of “consideration”

AV Concepts Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2013] UKFTT 646 – Whether goods were sold for a combination of cash and the value of part-exchange items, or whether the part-exchange items were in substance the equivalent of a discount so that the goods should be treated as sold for the cash consideration alone – Appeal dismissed

HMRC v Esporta Limited [2013] UKUT 173 – whether First-tier Tribunal erred in concluding that membership fees recovered after access to club’s facilities had been denied due to non-payment were not consideration for a supply but compensation – held yes – appeal allowed

Vehicle Control Services v HMRC [2012] UKUT 130b – supply of parking control services – whether parking charges collected and retained by operator were consideration for a supply – whether outside the scope of VAT as damages for trespass or damages for breach of a contract between the operator and the motorist – whether additional consideration payable by landowner for provision of parking control services – appeal dismissed

Canotec Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2011] UKFTT 661 – Supply for a consideration – Payment made by equipment dealer to finance leasing company – Payment was consideration for termination of existing finance leasing agreement relating to old equipment – Payment made as part of deal by which customer under existing finance leasing agreement agrees to enter into new leasing agreement of upgraded agreement – Whether VAT charged on payment is input tax of equipment dealer

Riverside Sports & Leisure Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2008] UKVAT V20848 – Value Added Tax – Barter transaction asserted to involve provision of services in return for lease – whether rights were retained by the counter-party school or whether they were the consideration for the lease – how to value the consideration for the services – points of principle to be followed in valuing the consideration – Appeal dismissed

GSTD 2013/1 ‘Goods and services tax: when a payment for a supply fails, is a failed payment fee charged by the supplier consideration for a supply?’

GSTD 2006/3 – Austlii – Goods and services tax: are settlement adjustments taken into account to determine the consideration for the supply or acquisition of real property?

GSTD 2005/4 – Austlii – Goods and services tax: are ‘wholesale holdback’ and ‘retail holdback’ payments made by a motor vehicle manufacturer or importer of new motor vehicles to a dealer consideration for a supply?

GSTD 2004/4 – Austlii – Goods and services tax: can consideration for a supply be provided or received without transferring money (such as where the parties only make book entries regarding their agreement that the supply is paid for)?

Guru 4U and Commissioner of Taxation [2014] AATA 740 – the Tribunal has found that the applicant was not carrying on an enterprise. The Tribunal found that the taxpayer had intended to start an enterprise but had not yet done so. Accordingly, the Commissioner was required to cancel its GST registration and it was not liable to pay GST and not entitled to input tax credits; at [70] there is an important distinction to be made between commencement and preparation for commencement of an enterprise; at [71]: the intention of a taxpayer is clearly a relevant consideration in determining whether a particular activity constitutes the carrying on of an enterprise

The Married Couple and Commissioner of Taxation [2013] AATA 888 – the applicant failed to establish that it was carrying on a business of growing olive trees and producing olives and olive oil where it had purchased land, constructed a residence on the land and cleared some of the land – at [61]: the activities of the applicant were essentially preparatory in nature and lacked commercial character.

Professional Admin Service Centres Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation [2013] FCA 1123 – at [39]: Australian income tax law jurisprudence emphasises the existence of a profit-making purpose, repetition and regularity, the conduct of activities using business-like methods, the volume of activity and the existence of a significant commercial purpose as relevant indicia to a finding that the activity or activities constitute a business. But para (b) of s 9-20(1) makes it clear that an “enterprise” can include an isolated commercial venture in the nature of trade, which implies that it be entered into for a commercial purpose, including the purpose of profit-making.

Clayton and Commissioner of Taxation [2013] AATA 428 – the applicant failed to establish that it was carrying on a business of eco-tourism when it acquired land – at [18]: While there were some features of a business present during the period under review, the activities are better described as preparatory and exploratory in nature. – (Case analysis)

SXGX and Commissioner of Taxation [2011] AATA 110 – the sale of land by the applicant to the Qld government where the land was within an area identified for compulsory acquisition was a supply – at [29]: the supply was made in the course of the applicant’s enterprise as a used car dealer because the land was acquired for future development of the used car yard – the sale was in the course of conducting its enterprise

Russell v Commissioner of Taxation [2011] FCAFC 10– applicant failed to establish that during the relevant period he carried on enterprise of accountant but established that he was carrying on an enterprise of a naturist retreat – the Court disagreed with the primary judge that there was not yet a business of a naturist retreat being carried on, only the undertaking of steps which were precursors to the commencement of such a business – at [87]: in determining whether the entity was “carrying on” an enterprise at the relevant time, intention or purpose of the acquisition is relevant but not determinative – at [100]: the taxpayer’s purpose in making certain expenditures was the establishment and conduct of the naturist retreat and he had therefore commenced his enterprise – first instance Russell v FC of T [2009] FCA 1224

Commissioner of Taxation v Swansea Services Pty Ltd [2009] FCA 402 – entity acquiring a collection of artwork and antiques found by Tribunal to be carrying on an enterprise – finding upheld on appeal – at [63]: there is nothing in the legislation that indicates that investment activities would not amount to the carrying on of an enterprise and the relatively low turnover threshold is consistent with eligibility being available even when sales at any given period have been minimal – at [64]: one activity alone may qualify as an enterprise – at [67]: it cannot be discerned from the legislation or from the Explanatory Memoranda that Parliament’s intention was that such ‘capital’ activities would not amount to the carrying on of an enterprise notwithstanding that such activities may not ordinarily amount to the ‘carrying on of a business’ or the ‘undertaking of a profit making scheme’ – at [68]: the GST Act definitions of ‘enterprise’ and ‘carrying on an enterprise’ appear on their face (consistently with the Explanatory Memoranda) to be substantially broader than the notion of ‘carrying on a business’ for the purposes of income tax regulation – at [74]: there are cases where subjectively expressed purpose may be relevant evidence to consider in the ultimate objective test of whether an enterprise is carried on – at [99]: the words “in the form of” have the effect of extending the reach of ‘enterprise’ to those activities which are in the form of a business but would not, in the ordinary meaning of ‘business’ be considered such. But the activity must still be reasonably intended to be profit making in the case of an individual and cannot for any entity simply be a private recreational pursuit or hobby

Rendyl Properties Pty Limited and Commissioner of Taxation [2009] AATA 177 – importer of a boat was not carrying on an enterprise – at [35]: an intention “to make a profit” is not the same as “to make money” and it is not enough to expect to be able to generate revenue – at [39]: the Tribunal’s general impression was that the boat’s revenue-generating opportunities were thought of more as a means of defraying some of the costs of ownership and operation of the boat than as essential elements of establishing a viable, profit-making business

Goldberg and Anor and Commissioner of Taxation [2008] AATA 1045 – applicant involved in a book publishing initiative was not carrying on an enterprise – at [35]: the activity carried out was in the nature of an isolated venture of particular interest to the individuals involved and with no plan in place to show how a profit could be made

D’Arcy and Commissioner of Taxation [2008] AATA 709 – applicant involved in the breeding of horses not carrying on an enterprise – at [26]: the Tribunal was unable to distinguish his activities from those of a person who, with a keen interest in horses and their breeding, chooses to become a part-owner of broodmares for the purpose of pleasure or recreation, or as a hobby

Drysdale and Commissioner of Taxation [2008] AATA 393 – acquisition of a yacht by the applicant not an enterprise but done for a private recreational pursuit or hobby or without a reasonable expectation of profit or gain – at [13]: the words “your enterprise” confine eligibility for input tax credits to acquisitions made for an enterprise of the applicant

Peerless Marine Pty Ltd and Commissioner of Taxation [2006] AATA 765 – applicant carrying on a business (and an enterprise) in connection with a powered catamaran – at [69]-[71]: consideration of legal principles – enterprise carried on notwithstanding that it was “spectacularly unsuccessful” and produced only modest receipts – not of a private or domestic nature

Toyama Pty Ltd v Landmark Building Developments Pty Ltd [2006] NSWSC 83 – at [65]-[77]: the sale of land vested in a trustee pursuant to the order of a Court was made in furtherance of an enterprise carried on by the trustee – the trustee carried on an enterprise, being a series of activities done in the course of a business (being a series of activities required to be undertaken pursuant to their appointment as trustees for sale) – the words “in the form of a business” extends the meaning of enterprise beyond entities carrying on a business to encompass activities that have the appearance or characteristics of business activities – one activity done in the form of a business can be an enterprise

Smith v Commissioner of Inland Revenue [2016] NZTRA 9 – whether the taxpayer had commenced the activity of vineyard and farming – whether attempts of taxpayer to purchase land and machinery (which did not proceed) were properly described as a business activity or preparatory steps towards a business activity

Living Friends Tree Farm v The Queen 2016 TCC 116 – whether the taxpayer was carrying on a “commercial activity” of the farming of Christmas trees – whether the work undertaken, in respect to the preparation of the property with roads, fencing, wells, and construction of barn and greenhouse, was preparatory and that this type of agricultural activity meant that profit would not be immediate but would be expected at some point in the future when the trees matured – at [22]: the eligibility of expenses that give rise to ITCs in the start-up phase of any business will require that a taxpayer show not only a clear intention to commence a commercial enterprise but also evidence of the steps taken in support of that stated intention

Land and Sea Enterprises Ltd v The Queen 2011 TCC 101 – whether taxpayer carrying on a commercial activity of horse breeding and training and entitled to input tax credits for acquisitions during the start up phase of that activity – at [14]: It is clear that an activity may be considered a commercial activity well in advance of the stage of profitability. It will always be a question of fact. Expenditures giving rise to ITCs in the start-up phase of a commercial activity may be eligible provided that there is clear intention to commence a business and that measurably significant and fundamental steps and actions have been put into place.

Rulings and Determinations

MT 2006/1 – Austlii – The New Tax System: the meaning of entity carrying on an enterprise for the purposes of entitlement to an Australian Business Number

GSTD 2006/6 – Austlii – Goods and services tax: does MT 2006/1 have equal application to the meaning of ‘entity’ and ‘enterprise’ for the purposes of the A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999?

Saga Holidays Limited v Commissioner of Taxation [2006] FCAFC 191 – supply to overseas tourists of travel to Australia including accommodation was “connected with Australia” because the supply included “real property” as defined in s 195-1 – at [36]: the definition of “real property” is not confined to interests that would warrant that description under the general law, and extends beyond proprietary interests and includes interests that are purely contractual as well as personal interests that may or may not have arisen under contract – at [67]: by means of the concept of ‘supply’ and the extended definition of ‘real property’, s 9-25(4) seeks to catch any supply of contractual rights where the exercise of those rights will have a real, rather than exiguous, remote or insignificant, connection with land in Australia.

Daunter v Revenue & Customs [2007] UKVAT V20120 – VAT – ZERO-RATING – international services – place of supply – whether supplies of services of UK solicitors relating to court case in UK to be treated as made in UK or Jersey – held place of supplies was UK – whether supplies of services related to land – yes – supplies held to be correctly standard-rated – appeal dismissed

Burrows v Revenue & Customs [2007] UKVAT V20454 – PLACE OF SUPPLY – the Appellant supplied acting services for the production of a film, Perfect Creature in New Zealand – the Appellant’s acting services related to artistic, cultural and entertainment activities – no requirement that the supplies had to be made before a live audience – the Appellant’s supplies were physically carried out in New Zealand – the application of the words of article 9(2)(c) to the facts produced a construction that the place of supply was New Zealand – this construction met the purposes of article 9(2) and 9(2)(c) – satisfied the requirements of legal certainty, produced a rational solution, avoided distortion of competition and supplied no incentive for the Appellant to move her place of business – the place of supply of Appellant’s supply of acting services was New Zealand – Appeal allowed

Starline and Wessex Taxis Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2007] UKVAT V20294 – Who makes a supply – principal and agent – taxi drivers driving Appellant’s taxis – fees received from rank journeys, telephone bookings through the Appellant, and from the Appellant’s account customers – who performed the service – what consideration was received for it – what was VATable

Invesco Canada Ltd v The Queen 2015 TCC 375 – determination of the value of consideration paid by various mutual fund trusts to the taxpayer for the supply of management services to the funds – whether certain management fee reductions to large investors were part of the consideration

Invesco Canada Ltd v The Queen 2014 TCC 375 – determination of the value of consideration paid by various mutual fund trusts to the taxpayer for the supply of management services to the funds – whether certain management fee reductions to large investors were part of the consideration

GF Partnership v The Queen 2013 TCC 53 – whether builder and developer of residential subdivisions liable to GST on consideration including development charges – or whether development charges payable directly by purchaser and therefore not included in the price

Commissioner of Taxation v Luxottica Retail Australia Pty Ltd [2011] FCAFC 20 – at [16]: s s 9-80 recognises that a single supply may be comprised of components that are classified differently for GST purposes; the sale of spectacles is just such a case. For that distinction to be meaningful the amount of GST payable in respect of that supply (actual supply) must reflect the proportion that the taxable component bears to the whole of the supply – at [26] the formula in s 9-80(2) cannot be made to work and it is “impenetrably circular” (Case Analysis) – first Instance [2010] AATA 22

Food Supplier and Commissioner of Taxation [2007] AATA 1550 – at [21]-[23]: s 9-80 has not function in determining whether GST is payable, but can only arise where the supply of products is liable to GST under other parts of the Act, s 9-80 provides the means by which the necessary calculation of GST must be made – s 9-80 requires an apportionment, that the section may be difficult to apply is not a reason for declining the task of apportionment or treating the supply as not falling within its terms

International cases

Meiji and Co Ltd v Revenue and Customs [2017] UKFTT 573 – apportionment of optician’s income between exempt dispensing income and standard rated sales of spectacles. Whether there was a prior agreement as to the method of apportionment – no; how costs should be calculated for a costs based apportionment.

Archives

Archives

Site Stats

218,845 views

Disclaimer

The material and opinions in this site are those of the author and should not be used or treated as professional advice and readers should rely on their own enquiries in making any decisions concerning their own interests.